However, the rationale I've read on the 4k resolution question is that the visible resolution ends up being about 3.8k, which is equivalent to a telecine transfer of 35mm. Granted, digital video still does not have the latitude of film yet, but it also doesn't have the associated costs.

I think that Red is changing the game by introducing a much greater value for the $40k you will ultimately spend on it. That said, they'll have to beef up their products and their business model if they want to be a viable player. Regardless of whether or not they survive, though, I think they've stimulated the market in a way that is beneficial to professionals as well as the Nowheresville amateurs who don't know any better.

What will be really interesting is seeing what "Che" looks like, since Steven Soderbergh shot that entirely with the Red One. I would say that his opinion qualifies as an expert as he shoots his own films, and he apparently likes this camera. Unless he has changed his mind.

Apparently Red.com has some testimonials from some other non-experts like Doug Liman, Tony Richmond and Crash (http://www.red.com/interviews).

Now I've never shot with the camera, and don't know anyone who has (possibly a buddy out in LA, but I'm not sure if he shot with it, or just knew someone who had), but I'd give it a once around the block to see for myself.

- Rob

As a professional working in this business for 20+ years, I would like to offer a first hand experience opinion as to why RED has not, and will never be a "game changer".

Despite a lot of slick marketing, and non-expert "professional opinions" the camera is not good, even for the price, period. The RED is 4K in name only.

Sony makes an HD camera called the EX1, and sells it for $10,000 less than the RED camera body. The Sony EX1 comes with a lens, viewfinder and flash memory storage card. The RED camera does not. Now you might think the Sony is less expensive because it's only "HD", well then why does the HD camera have more visible resolution than the RED camera? The images of the test can be found on-line. Visible resolution is the only resolution that matters, not the resolution of the sensor.

RED's issues with their imaging system are plentiful, the workflow is awkward at best, and data security is near non-existent. RED designs products for wedding videographers, film students and local TV shooters in middle-of-nowhereseville, who (I'm sorry to report) truly don't know better.

Professionals can never have data loss, "just re-shoot it", or "we warned you the camera is still 'in development'" are never acceptable answers in professional situations when there's a problem.

The only actual 4K digital cinema camera is made by DALSA. To be perfectly blunt, RED does a disservice by saying they are 4K.

Last month at the ASC technical committee meeting in Hollywood, RED's "Leader of the Rebellion" Ted Schilowitz, stated the camera doesn't actually have 4K worth of visible resolution, but that they feel it's okay to say 4K because that's how many pixels they have in the camera.

It's kind of like saying, our fancy new $17,500 (RED's body price) car has a V8 engine, but when you drive it only 4-cylinders are ever functional. But we feel it's proper to call the engine a "V8" because we have 8-cylinders. And by the way, if you want tires, seats and a steering wheel, well all those are extra. All said and done your new 4-cylinder powered "V8" car is going to cost you $40,000 (What a RED with accessories runs).

You could have driven to your grandmother's for Thanksgiving faster and in more style, (and probably not break down along the way) by driving a proper car, made by a company that has actually built a car before.

Al